#same for family same for partners.

[partangel]

would love to hear more about your take on the "people have the obligation to help themselves and get better, if they dont they are bad" thing because you’re sooo right

i just don't think it is as simply and as linear as social media trends make it seem, i think humans are becoming more and more self-invested, self-centered and therefore isolated. i think we dehumanize others and attribute meaningless labels... "red flags this, yellow flags this" i mean, what?

on the internet, particularly tumblr, there was an entire period of romanticizing decay and victimization which was ridiculously bad and not promoter of any type of growth be it for the individual or the relationships they maintained. but the 180º extreme switch that happened is frankly as bad. i believe there's a whole difference between accounting for your mistakes and realizing certain behaviours are not okay with others and TRYING to do better while also giving context to your own struggles in certain aspects in comparison to the whole "maybe you're just toxic and should be put down or smth". like, what in the world? sometimes it just feels like people stopped being people and stopped seeing others as people just like them. i feel like we are just assets. where is the humanism? why have we stopped treating people as people????? are you a full fledged human without your "faults" and "vices"????? or are you just emulating a persona that will never exist and therefore will never to fully connect to others??? why do others prefer to build a relationship with a persona instead of a real human... its easier to manage relationships that dont truly exist, but isnt it as easy as it is isolating?

no one should go to therapy forced by others. no one should take medication forced by others. functionality and stability should not be reached by imposing threats on an human being. in the end that's not helping anyone. its as ive said, i started taking a medication for others and not for me, it did nothing besides making me worse. however, other people were eager to be more human to me because i was taking medication. while im exactly the same, other people have changed the way they interact with me due to a pill. why?

not to talk about the "ugly" mentally ill. the mentally ill that has trouble managing emotions, the mentally ill that has a personality disorder, the mentally ill that can't maintain relationships as well as others because they need their time. the upset mentally ill the traumatized mentally ill the raging mentally ill. as if everything is treated by medication and therapy. as if it isn't a luck to get an actual competent therapist. as if, in going to therapy and it failing, you just spent hours retraumatizing and reliving everything again for nothing. but well. you went to therapy. you pass the check on good mentally ill. doesn't matter if it changed anything or made things worse, you showed you were compromised to others in your life. now you deserve being treated like a human. now if you have a bad day they can tell you "talk to your therapist" and excuse your grumpiness or your suicidal ideation.

most of healing happens in the secure relationships you maintain during your life. except now, talking to your friend about a problem you're having is labeled as "dumping" and is regarded as an orange yellow flag because "thats not what a friend is for". if anything happens negative you should not share with your friends or companion or family, they have a lot going on already, why dont you go and see therapist?

like for fucks sake. that means we dont maintain relationships. we maintain transactions.

[haventacluewhatimdoing]

Okay but Donna. DONNA. She gets to live her life with both her husband AND her platonic life partner. She'd wanted to be with him forever and now she CAN. She gets both a permanent romantic and permanent platonic partner. Who like each other. Who don't resent the other's existence. Do you understand how MONUMENTAL that is???

[vaguely-concerned]

purple hawke who, at malcolm's death, lost not only a father, a mentor, the single most stable and safe point in their world up until this moment. but also the only person in their life who would consistently, gleefully 'yes, and — ' them. the loss, in one fell swoop, of both a beloved parent and your sole willing — no, not only willing, enthusiastic — improv partner. truly, the most unkindest cut of all that the maker could have seen fit to deal. (there's always so much less laughter in the house, after malcolm's gone.)

and then after all the horrors of the blight and trying to make a new life in the shithole turned shithome of kirkwall....... they meet varric. and something that's been slumbering deep within their soul dries a tear of relief and joy and whispers 'oh we are so back'. and they are so right

[fizpup]

valentine, you're a horse ❤️

[ryoalouette]

Machi's Idea #4

The JL can't understand what's wrong. They did their best effort to honor the king of dead and celebrate accordingly with the most strict protocol. Yet the king seems equally dull and annoyed. The JLD knows what's going on but they decided to say nothing in the hopes that this would teach the JL a lesson. Jason tried to explain the situation but none of the "adults" (aka Batman) listened to him so he decided to get his point across by getting into a fist fight with the king. One hour later they are kissing and Jason is explaining to the JL that ghost bond through fighting.

[aronarchy]

Why we don’t like it when children hit us back

To all the children who have ever been told to “respect” someone that hated them.

March 21, 2023

Even those of us that are disturbed by the thought of how widespread corporal punishment still is in all ranks of society are uncomfortable at the idea of a child defending themself using violence against their oppressors and abusers. A child who hits back proves that the adults “were right all along,” that their violence was justified. Even as they would cheer an adult victim for defending themself fiercely.

Even those “child rights advocates” imagine the right child victim as one who takes it without ever stopping to love “its” owners. Tear-stained and afraid, the child is too innocent to be hit in a guilt-free manner. No one likes to imagine the Brat as Victim—the child who does, according to adultist logic, deserve being hit, because they follow their desires, because they walk the world with their head high, because they talk back, because they are loud, because they are unapologetically here, and resistant to being cast in the role of guest of a world that is just not made for them.

If we are against corporal punishment, the brat is our gotcha, the proof that it is actually not that much of an injustice. The brat unsettles us, so much that the “bad seed” is a stock character in horror, a genre that is much permeated by the adult gaze (defined as “the way children are viewed, represented and portrayed by adults; and finally society’s conception of children and the way this is perpetuated within institutions, and inherent in all interactions with children”), where the adult fear for the subversion of the structures that keep children under control is very much represented.

It might be very well true that the Brat has something unnatural and sinister about them in this world, as they are at constant war with everything that has ever been created, since everything that has been created has been built with the purpose of subjugating them. This is why it feels unnatural to watch a child hitting back instead of cowering. We feel like it’s not right. We feel like history is staring back at us, and all the horror we felt at any rebel and wayward child who has ever lived, we are feeling right now for that reject of the construct of “childhood innocence.” The child who hits back is at such clash with our construction of childhood because we defined violence in all of its forms as the province of the adult, especially the adult in authority.

The adult has an explicit sanction by the state to do violence to the child, while the child has both a social and legal prohibition to even think of defending themself with their fists. Legislation such as “parent-child tort immunity” makes this clear. The adult’s designed place is as the one who hits, and has a right and even an encouragement to do so, the one who acts, as the person. The child’s designed place is as the one who gets hit, and has an obligation to accept that, as the one who suffers acts, as the object. When a child forcibly breaks out of their place, they are reversing the supposed “natural order” in a radical way.

This is why, for the youth liberationist, there should be nothing more beautiful to witness that the child who snaps. We have an unique horror for parricide, and a terrible indifference at the 450 children murdered every year by their parents in just the USA, without even mentioning all the indirect suicides caused by parental abuse. As a Psychology Today article about so-called “parricide” puts it:

Unlike adults who kill their parents, teenagers become parricide offenders when conditions in the home are intolerable but their alternatives are limited. Unlike adults, kids cannot simply leave. The law has made it a crime for young people to run away. Juveniles who commit parricide usually do consider running away, but many do not know any place where they can seek refuge. Those who do run are generally picked up and returned home, or go back on their own: Surviving on the streets is hardly a realistic alternative for youths with meager financial resources, limited education, and few skills.

By far, the severely abused child is the most frequently encountered type of offender. According to Paul Mones, a Los Angeles attorney who specializes in defending adolescent parricide offenders, more than 90 percent have been abused by their parents. In-depth portraits of such youths have frequently shown that they killed because they could no longer tolerate conditions at home. These children were psychologically abused by one or both parents and often suffered physical, sexual, and verbal abuse as well—and witnessed it given to others in the household. They did not typically have histories of severe mental illness or of serious and extensive delinquent behavior. They were not criminally sophisticated. For them, the killings represented an act of desperation—the only way out of a family situation they could no longer endure.

- Heide, Why Kids Kill Parents, 1992.

Despite these being the most frequent conditions of “parricide,” it still brings unique disgust to think about it for most people. The sympathy extended to murdering parents is never extended even to the most desperate child, who chose to kill to not be killed. They chose to stop enduring silently, and that was their greatest crime; that is the crime of the child who hits back. Hell, children aren’t even supposed to talk back. They are not supposed to be anything but grateful for the miserable pieces of space that adults carve out in a world hostile to children for them to live following adult rules. It isn’t rare for children to notice the adult monopoly on violence and force when they interact with figures like teachers, and the way they use words like “respect.” In fact, this social dynamic has been noticed quite often:

Sometimes people use “respect” to mean “treating someone like a person” and sometimes they use “respect” to mean “treating someone like an authority” and sometimes people who are used to being treated like an authority say “if you won’t respect me I won’t respect you” and they mean “if you won’t treat me like an authority I won’t treat you like a person” and they think they’re being fair but they aren’t, and it’s not okay.

(https://soycrates.tumblr.com/post/115633137923/stimmyabby-sometimes-people-use-respect-to-mean)

But it has received almost no condemnation in the public eye. No voices have raised to contrast the adult monopoly on violence towards child bodies and child minds. No voices have raised to praise the child who hits back. Because they do deserve praise. Because the child who sets their foot down and says this belongs to me, even when it’s something like their own body that they are claiming, is committing one of the most serious crimes against adult society, who wants them dispossessed.

Sources:

“The Adult Gaze: a tool of control and oppression,” https://livingwithoutschool.com/2021/07/29/the-adult-gaze-a-tool-of-control-and-oppression

“Filicide,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filicide

[invye]

Dressrosa would obviously be quite different in the CoraMiShanks AU, given that, well, Rosinante is there to help kick Doffy's behind, but I'm not sure if I want to touch the happenings in present day canon yet.

HOWEVER! I am once again thinking about how in canon Zoro dragged Law into the party after---

Zoro dragging Law along to have a drink and they inevitably talk about swords (it's Zoro and Law carries an interesting blade, what did you expect?) when Zoro, slightly tipsy, lets slip that he trained with old Hawkeyes for two years.

Law, already fully sloshed (seriously he should have known better than to try matching Zoro for drinks), immediately goes: "Does Hawk-san's 'training' still include tossing you across the entire island and letting you fend against the stupid monkeys for yourself?"

And Zoro just absolutely loses it. What do you mean Law knows that he's spend most of those two years traipsing around lost on that stupid foggy island?? What do you mean Hawk-san???

And drunk Law long-windedly explains that he grew up with Mihawk around, even lived in his dilapidated castle for a while with Cora-san, before they returned to the North Blue so Law could finish school. He even had extended dealings with the Red Emperor during that time, and don't belive what anyone tells you, they're both stupid powerful, but also stupid dorks, it's unbelievable how Cora-san is so attached to these idiots...

And while Law drunkenly prattles on, Zoro is sitting there, head in his hands, realising Hawkeyes actually did a good job with Law, even though his technique is disappointingly reliant on his devil fruit; which means that Hawkeyes probably also did a good job with him, and that on top of that, he might actually really care..?

Druing the trip from Zou to Wano with the Heart Pirates, Zoro learns that they all know Hawkeyes, or Hawk-san as Law calls him and they copy; because when they first set out he showed up all intimidating with his huge sword and unwavering stare and icily told them to "stay safe" and "don't bite off more than you can chew" and "here is my contact, do not use it" and he has shown up somewhat regularly since, especially after Cora-san officially joined the crew when they entered the New World.

Zoro is left sitting there with the knowledge that Hawkeyes apparently has at least three vaguely adopted children, and that he does care. And Zoro has no idea how he is supposed to feel about the knowledge that he is one of those children now.

[eliounora]

it's so pleasing to see people who are related looking similar. like when you see a parent and their child is a tiny version of them. or when a group of cousins have the same nose. or when someone looks the same as their grandparent did when they were young. genetics. wondrous

[caluupin]

Finished TGAAC around 2 1/2 weeks ago but only finished the doodles today. but still, here ya go!

[leftmysoulbythesideoftheroad]

god fucking damnit. i woke up from a nightmare this morning and just immediately broke down sobbing. sometimes i cry after a nightmare (because they’re literally all about the people i love suddenly being indifferent/cruel to me), but i still feel like i could start crying again any second

[myreia]

✦ D I S C I P L E O F T H E H A N D

Alchemy for potions. Blacksmithing for repairs. Leatherworking and weaving for mending. She is not an artisan, but the basic skills she has picked up over the years have served her well. Self-sufficiency has always been at the forefront of her mind, and she is pleased that she can keep herself afloat when needed. Besides, crafting is relaxing. A hobby or two here and there is good for her mind. —level 90 compendium

[invisible-brandy]

rewatched phil's video this morning again and the first story got me thinking again about how teenage me was convinced that everyone in the lgbtq community believed that dating people who are still (partially or not) closeted was a bad thing and if you're closeted you will need to out yourself for the relationship. which filled me with insane amounts of dread at times, obviously.

and now phil's coming out in college mention? idk i love them both so much. i love that phil did that for him. they are both so devoted to each other ("that's the plan") and are ready to give into each other and support each other ugh no that's it im getting genuinely emotional over them

[somecunttookmyurl]

all the while society conflates "being an adult" with "having a proper job" and "having money to make arbitrary Adult Purchases" disabled people who can't work - or can only work part time or can only do entry level baby jobs - will never be 'allowed' to be adults

you can say "being an adult is looking after yourself you don't have to have a job!!!" all you want but most people who say that will still assume anybody who doesn't either can't or won't 'look after themselves' actually. and every 'marker' of 'adulthood' that's observable and thus actually counts or whatever loops back around to... having a job and 'contributing' something

[anarchy-and-piglins]

Favorite depiction of techno and phil's friendship is them as adoption duo - phil will adopt every child that even looks at him just slightly sad and techno will adopt any animal that comes within a 10m radius of him and they raise them together as weird queerplatonic coparents. They go their sepatate ways for the day to do their own thing and arrive back home in the evening at the same time. Stand-off in front of the door.

Phil, holding a blanket (swaddling a baby): techno what's in the box?

Techno, holding a box (of abandoned puppies): what's in the blanket philza?

YEAAAH that's the ticket right there. Also, that's just canon for dsmp. I enjoy family-coded SBI a lot with Techno as the middle child but honestly, when it comes to dsmp canon or even just specific AU I definitely need more qpp besties emduo in my life, it's A+

[rexscanonwife]

Happy Mexican heritage day, by the way! Thanks to my whitewashed-ass mom I didn't grow up with that much of the culture, but I'm proud to be a part of it nonetheless!! 💖🇲🇽💖🇲🇽💖🇲🇽💖🇲🇽💖🇲🇽💖

To celebrate I'm gonna imagine showing my f/os things from Mexican culture where applicable > u <

[gellavonhamster]

наталі !!! раскажыце, калі не ўскладніць, як публіка ў латвіі рэагуе на валасы на жаночым целе, калі з такім сутыкаліся👉👈 (можна англійскай, каб больш людзей зразумела) p.s. дзякую за рэбложык ніжэй (вельмі адгукнуўся🫶)

Oh, I wish I could provide a comprehensive answer, but the problem is that I may not be the best person to ask about that because I don't really have any social circle to speak of 🤦‍♀️ All I can say is that so far I haven't noticed people, strangers or not, give me dirty looks because of body hair, or comment upon it in any way. I don't read any Latvian fashion/women's magazines or articles online, so I'm not really up with the trends apart from seeing what's currently sold in shops. Most women I see on the streets here in Riga have shaved legs, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone with shaved arms - it never occurred to me some people remove arm hair too until I saw someone mention it online at some point.

One thing I remember is that when I was a kid, we had that one teacher who had long dark leg hair and didn't shave it, and we constantly made fun of her. Not to her face, obviously - just snickering among ourselves and coming up with names and teasing rhymes. That was ugly and looking back, I am ashamed of it. But I'm not sure how well that reflects current children's/young people's views because that was in mid 00s and I feel like beauty standards were more rigid back then.